header-logo header-logo

24 March 2023
Issue: 8018 / Categories: Legal News , International justice , Sanctions , Rule of law
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Oligarchs, confiscated assets & the future of Kyiv

115856
Could seized sanctions assets be used to fund the reconstruction of Ukraine? It’s a fascinating question. 

In this week’s NLJ, Maria Nizzero writes that ‘policymakers have expressed increased interest in freezing, seizing, but also repurposing the sanctioned assets, including those of the so-called “oligarchs”, for the benefit of Kyiv’.

Nizzero, a research fellow at RUSI’s Centre for Financial Crime and Security Studies, points out, however, there are ‘inherent limitations’ in this plan, before setting out some of the complexities, obstacles and potential routes around the obstacles.

She writes: ‘Choosing to prioritise the strengthening of the sanctions regime is not a Sophie’s choice for policymakers: bolstering the response to sanctions evasion now does not imply that permanent confiscation of other Russian sanctioned assets cannot be achieved.’ 

Read more on this subject here.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll